Table 4. Research methodology

"... In PAGE 11: ...3. Which is the methodological profile followed by the e-SCM papers published in the most prestigious OM and Logistics journals? Table4 shows the research methodologies used in the papers contained in our database. The methodologies most used have been descriptive, empirical and decision models.... ..."

Table 1 indicates the coverage of information management system layers (see Figure 2-1) by each of the above research efforts. This table is intended as only a general guideline; the read- er should consult the overviews in Appendix A or the related references for more detailed in- formation on these research efforts.

Table 2. Major rice genome and germplasm databases.

"... In PAGE 4: ... The literature on different aspects of rice research has also been catalogued for searching on the Web for the user community. Informatics for the rice community More than 20 databases and Web sites are currently available online for rice genomics ( Table2 ). Most of these databases focus on specialized and detailed information covering a broad range of research on rice genomics or rice biology, whereas some are designed for ordinary users and offer general information on rice.... In PAGE 5: ... Table2 continued. Database/ URL Information categories organizationa U.... ..."

Table 6: TMS Research that emphasises technical quality through IT in general.

"... In PAGE 33: ...0.13% 22.63% +2.50 + 12.4% Table6 : Comparison of Data Measurement Differences Between Standish Group 1994 and 2004 UK Sample Issue Standish method UK Study Method Continuous categorical measures Categorical Advantage that it simplifies answering for the respondent. Disadvantages that the categories Continuous Advantage that it is specific and permits ... In PAGE 34: ... This suggests that if the Standish Group does not use a correction for the categorical data, the estimates Standish provides are likely overestimating the actual performance variances in the range of 10 to 20%. Table6 summarizes the methodological issue and the pros and cons of the different approaches of capturing project variance information. THE ANALYSIS METHOD A third factor that may cause the observed differences in performance is the analysis method.... In PAGE 34: ...7.4% success, 16.6% abandoned, and 66% challenged as defined by the Standish Group categories. These numbers can be compared with the results from the Standish Group 2004 survey (Hartmann, 2006) that provided estimates of 29% success, 18% failure and 53% challenged provided in Column A in Table6 . The results in Columns A and B show that even when using the same criteria for categorizing projects, the sample results do not correspond closely.... In PAGE 64: ...8273 Demographics 5.0889 Table6 . Factor-Level Means In order to test the hypotheses, we performed a two-step procedure of a repeated measures single factor Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) followed by a multiple comparison test.... ..."

Table 7: TMS Research that emphasises user satisfaction through IT in general

"... In PAGE 34: ... Continuous data from the UK sample allows us to define the three resolution types as defined above. These results are shown in column B in Table7 using then Standish Group criteria. The results indicate that the UK sample would have provided a 17.... In PAGE 34: ... The results in Columns A and B show that even when using the same criteria for categorizing projects, the sample results do not correspond closely. The results in Table7 also show a failure rate in the UK study that is almost half the rate of the Standish Group 2004 study. A similar abandonment rate of projects in the US study (9%) suggests a significant discrepancy between the two sets of results.... In PAGE 34: ... There are no obvious reasons for this discrepancy. Table7 : Project Type Percentages across Different Contingency Allowances in UK Study Project Type Column A: Standish 2004 Column B: UK Study (2004) 100% cutoff Column C: UK Study 5% contingency Column D: UK Study 10% contingency Column E UK Study 15% ... In PAGE 35: ...8% 9.2% 9.2% 9.2% 9.2% In addition to columns A and B, two other columns have been provided in Table7 . These columns indicate the percentage of project types that would result if the 100% on budget, time and scope constraints were relaxed.... ..."

Table 2. Comparison with the recognition rates of other research teams using the same database Researcher(year) Recognition rate(%)

"... In PAGE 9: ... 3. For comparison, Table2 gives our result along with those obtained by the other research teams (Suen et al., 1992; Lee, 1995) who used the same database as ours.... In PAGE 14: ...ig. 6. List of all the misclassified testing patterns Table 1. Comparison of classifiers Table2 . Comparison with the recognition rates of other research teams using the same database Table 3.... ..."

Table 3. Results reported over the BANCA database from other researchers.